- Tibetz
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
____________(˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜˜)_∏______
l | --------____.`=====.-.~:________\___|================[oo]
|_|||___/___/_/~```|_|_|_|``(o)----------<)
Posted by: Slartan117
Posted by: Tibetz
You can't fight an ex Arbiter. For an Arbiter to stop being an Arbiter it has to be deceased.
He is not the ex-Arbiter yet... he becomes the ex-Arbiter after you kill him and I was calling him the "ex" so people would not think I was talking about the current Arbiter, because then I would have gotten spammed with "You cant fight the Arbiter on Reach cause he wasnt the Arbiter yet."
Does anyone have common sense:
1. On Reach he is the current Arbiter.
2. Now on the Halo timeline we have a new Arbiter, and this is why I refer to the old Reach Arbiter as ex-Arbiter.
i.e.
If King Fred was the king of England 500 years ago, and King Bob is the current king, then King Fred would be the ex-King of England. And to be an "ex-king" you have to die. Now I know he didnt rule England as a dead man.
Please people use a little logic.
Arbiters are sent only on Suicide missions. Escaping doesn't really follow the history of the Arbiter.
Edit: Oh please, don't insult my "logic". In a story we do not reference things in the past tense. You called him an Ex-Arbiter while referring to how the story plays out. This is impossible because the story cannot refer to him in the past tense, so logically you shouldn't either.
Don't try and cover your own mistakes by pretending you meant something else.
[Edited on 11.22.2009 1:14 AM PST]